TheNextReport

The Urge to Surge The debate over whether to increase the number of troops in Iraq has been raging ever since the Iraq Study Group issued its report a few weeks ago recommending a temporary surge in troop levels to help control the deteriorating situation. The Bush administration now seems to cling to a desperate belief that adding 15-30,000 more troops to the Iraq theatre could at last bring down the curtain of the conflict with some measure of applause from the American public. Reports that the Joint Chiefs of Staff would be opposed to such an increase were summarily denied by the White House. Mr. Bush, who has publicly stated numerous times that his decision making in Iraq depends on the advice of his generals, would be in a difficult position if the reports about the Chiefs are accurate. The election of a new Congress with a Democratic majority has been seen by most observers as a clear indication that the majority of Americans are opposed to extending the conflict in Iraq. Polls

Responsibility in Washington Dennis Hastert said he accepted full responsibility for the Mark Foley scandal. Donald Rumsfeld said he accepted full responsibility for the Abu Grahib scandal. George Bush said he accepted full responsibility for Katrina, Dubai Ports, the record deficit and the war in Iraq. These statements beg the question: just what does accepting responsibility mean in our nation’s capital? After six long years of the Bush administration, the answer would seem obvious. Accepting responsibility in Washington means getting away with murder. Other than finally giving the boot to Donald Rumsfeld, President Bush, who has never held anyone in his administration truly accountable for the failures of his office, still appears unwilling to take the kind of corrective measures one might expect after seeing his party lose the Congress. By any standard, the Bush Administration has clearly been one of the most irresponsible regimes in the nation’s history. The president and party t